![]() ![]() The great historians of modern architecture, from Pevsner to Behrendt, from Gedion to Zevi, from Argan to Tafuri, from Benevolo to De Fusco, have in fact revealed - at different times, for different positions and purposes - the close and dense links of the figurative and architectural poetics that lay behind each artistic movement they revealed the significant structural, methodological and formal analogies of the works moreover, they highlighted the ideal correspondences that animated the activity of artists and architects at that time. However, research on the relationship between architecture and the visual arts in modernity is not new moreover, this research enriches a complex tradition which, far from undermining the autonomy and specificity of architecture, has, for example, revealed the complementary nature of the artistic and architectural experiences of the first decades of the 20th century. Critically, there is also the fact that such research implies a desire to discuss - with unmeasurable consequences - the existence of disciplinary specificities, or a desire to address the theme of the aesthetic primacy of the architectural product to the detriment of the objectivity of constructive practice and effective methodology or a desire to identify the hegemony of an expressive practice in the confrontation of the artistic fact as a whole. Something has happened since Le Corbusier asserted - with a simplicity and clear-sightedness that today would pass for suspicion - that the architect should be a very good connoisseur of art. ![]() This caution is hardly understandable considering that today many artists and architects work with materials and techniques that are heavily contaminated by other disciplinary fields. Artists and architects have long preferred to remain within their respective fields. As if the very fact of envisaging a contact between these two fields could harm and weaken them, especially for architecture. Putting forward the hypothesis that there may be a common ground for exchange between art and architecture gives rise to a certain fear. Difficulties of a methodological nature, and cultural difficulties linked to the very conditions of the research. To talk today about visual arts and architecture, and a possible dialogue between them, we must overcome some preliminary difficulties. As a different vehicle of architectural criticism, the third session (Visual Criticism) would like to pay attention to the photographic image and, more generally, to the visual components of architectural criticism. ![]() ![]() The second (Institutions, Exhibitions, Competitions) and fourth (Critical Competencies) sessions intend to broaden the notion of “actor” of architectural criticism not only to encompass critics or authors (the same notion of “authorship” in criticism might be subject to question) but also to include professional and academic institutions, publishers, and the various specialists who are involved in the actual production of professional publications. The first session Vehicles and Actors: Journals, Newspapers and their Editors deals with the influence on the forms, discourse, and contents of criticism on the part of specific types of journals, from daily newspapers, to cultural magazines and building construction periodicals and wants to put into question the categories that recurrently describe the so-called “typologies of criticism”. The four sessions investigate the links between the actors, the media of criticism, and the historical contexts within which they materialize, as well as the cultural, intellectual, and institutional milieus from which they originate. The workshop aims to expand the knowledge about the specific functions of these actors and their networks and to outline their mutual relationships. This second international workshop takes into consideration the actors and the vehicles of criticism: with these terms it refers to both the agents of criticism (critics, architects, historians, publishers, photographers, institutions, etc.) and the media through which criticism is disseminated (press, photography, exhibitions, etc.). After the first workshop at the Université Rennes 2 (January 2016), centered on the relationship of criticism to “public opinion” and on criticism as an autonomous discipline, Actors and Vehicles of Architectural Criticism (Università di Bologna, October 4-5, 2016) is the second of three international workshops planned by the : Architectural criticism 20th and 21st centuries, a cartography research project (funded by the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche, ANR) to foster scholarship on the history of architectural criticism and facilitate exchanges between scholars active in this field of research. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |